The hon. member opposite says that is overtaxation. In fact, it is prudent to have a reserve in place such that when we have crises that are outside of our creation, whether it is SARS, or an ice storm, or an international economic decline or a crisis in the manufacturing sector, we can weather those storms.
We will be watching the actions of the government very closely in the coming weeks and months. We will be holding them to account to ensure the government does not take Canada into deficit once again.
It is important that at a time when the Conservative spending has put us close to a deficit position and at a time when we are entering a period of economic uncertainty, a $350 million election on what is essentially a do nothing budget does not seem like sound economic policy or responsible politics. As a responsible opposition party, we have to apply pressure on an ongoing basis to the government to ensure that it does not put Canada into a deficit once again.
Speaking as an Atlantic Canadian, Atlantic Canadians were relieved that the Conservative government did not attack Atlantic Canada, as it did in the last budget when it killed the Atlantic accord. In the last budget it attacked Atlantic Canada; in this budget it ignored Atlantic Canada. It has gone from a Conservative government that holds Atlantic Canadians in contempt to a Conservative government that is indifferent to the needs of Atlantic Canada, so I guess it is a marginal improvement.
Beyond that, there is no mention of significant investment in child care and early learning. There is certainly very little on aboriginal files. Among its first actions as a government, it killed early child care and learning and the Kelowna accord.
On the auto sector, the government took a step to bring back an auto sector strategy. However, it paled in comparison, in terms of funding, with the Liberal auto sector strategy, which the current government killed upon its election.
In terms of manufacturing, the government took a timid step to extend the two year accelerated capital cost allowance to three years. Jayson Myers, the president of the Canadian Manufacturers & Exporters, said this about the budget:
They're eroding and diluting the single measure that would have been the most important for both investment and innovation and to do something for the environment.
He was absolutely right when he said the problem was that it took a while for companies to put capital investments in place. Companies take long term planning seriously and three years is not long enough; five years is required.
The budget does not really do a whole lot. It spreads money around a range of issues. The government is trying to look like it is accomplishing something, but in fact it is more about impressions than achieving anything.
I want to speak about not just what the budget did not do, but on what a visionary, responsible government ought to be doing right now.
Right now Canada has a remarkable opportunity to become a global leader in what will be the fastest growing area of the 21st century economy, and that is cleantech, environmental technologies and clean energy.
We are already an energy producer. That gives us an opportunity to leverage on that position, to go from being a traditional energy producer to being a clean energy producer. We should be putting the tax measures, regulatory measures and the direct investment into research and development that we require to make that transition as an economy.
I was at the World Economic Forum in Davos a few weeks ago. The top CEOs, business, political, finance thinkers and leaders from around the world were at that conference. They were clamouring to get into sessions on cleantech, on environmental technologies and on biofuels.
The consensus was that the world was moving toward a global carbon constraint economy, that individual governments would be putting a price on carbon. That is occurring already. France is speaking of a carbon tax and bringing in a carbon tariff. California is moving toward that. It is happening within our own country in fact. Quebec has moved in that direction with a carbon tax. The most recent budget in British Columbia put a very significant carbon tax in place and a green tax shift.
As the consensus becomes international policy, governments that have not prepared for this will go from being environmental laggards to being economic laggards. The same with companies that have not prepared for this. If their carbon footprint is too large, they will be economically uncompetitive.
We should be moving pre-emptively to put a price on carbon. That is why our party, under our leader, has presented the idea of a carbon budget. It would put a price on carbon to ensure that the 700 highest emitters in Canada would have a carbon budget within which live. If they went over that, based on $30 per tonne of carbon, they would pay into a fund from which they could withdraw money for investments in cleantech proposals, clean projects, infrastructure and green infrastructure. It is a very innovative approach. It is the kind of approach any responsible government, which recognizes the environmental imperative and the economic opportunity, would do.
Some of the most successful venture capital firms in the world, like Kleiner Perkins, one of the early stage investors in Yahoo, are putting most of their capital today in cleantech. Globally, companies like Goldman Sachs, the Carlyle Group and others are speaking of the cleantech opportunity. This is a great opportunity for Canada to excel in what will be a highly competitive industry.
It is also going to be an area where we should be deepening our trade and broadening our trade relationships. We should be focusing on China. I speak with a lot of Canadian business leaders who have long-standing business relationships in China. They speak of the business they are losing and the fact that we are falling behind in terms of our bilateral relationship with China because of the Conservative government's approach to China. At a time when we should be deepening the relationship and we should be presenting ourselves and building ties to become the clean energy partner that China needs, we are burning those bridges.
We need to go beyond the meaningless little tax measures designed to buy votes. We need significant broad-based tax reform, focused on building productivity and prosperity.
We need to invest in infrastructure because we have a national infrastructure deficit. It is a recreational infrastructure deficit in some communities and in many communities it is a green infrastructure deficit. We still have too many Canadian cities dumping raw sewage into harbours and into bodies of water. We have a significant crisis on transportation infrastructure and transit. We need to invest in agriculture as it is facing challenges.
The fact is we need a government with a vision. I am looking forward to exploring this vision more when we have questions and answers.
